Help desk
< June 28	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 30 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

June 29

Color coded text

Helped My userid preferences set some kinds of color coded text, but I want to know how that is set.

Look at Liberty Bell and you will see examples. Under the title there is green text "(Redirected from Liberty bell)" meaning redirect, and in orange "For other uses, see Liberty Bell (disambiguation)" meaning disambiguation, and below that in blue, the word "symbol and without an example in red "foobar-red for no reference at all.

So, how is color coded text turned on and off?--Dthomsen8 (talk) 02:15, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Dthomsen8: I think this article is what you're looking for: Help:Link color. It explains the default colors for Wikilinks and their meaning, then it tells you how you can alter your CSS file to change the colors for your view. Orville1974^talk 04:25, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dthomsen8: If you are currently using the Monobook skin, your User:Dthomsen8/monobook.js imports the link-colouring script User:Anomie/linkclassifier.js. There's documentation about that at User:Anomie/linkclassifier. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:02, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for those details. Now I see duplicates in my monobook.js to be deleted, which I will do. I printed the whole thing out to research lines I don't understand. If I need more help, I will post my question here. Anyone reading this section should consider setting colors this way. --Dthomsen8 (talk) 19:42, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Children's names in a BLP.

Helped I'm trying to convince a newish editor that it is our policy to not include the names of non-notable children in BLP articles. I cannot find the policy to point to. Help please! (The article in question is Sam Newman). HiLo48 (talk) 07:08, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLPNAME is that policy. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:14, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. HiLo48 (talk) 07:16, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria for getting "listed or featured" on Wikipedia

Helped Hi, Just wanted to know what is the criteria for getting listed or featured on Wikipedia. It would be nice if you would help us understand the same. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.186.174.252 (talk) 07:19, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! If you mean "listed" as in WP having an article about you, see Wikipedia:Notability (people). WP:LISTPEOPLE may also be relevant. If you mean "featured" as in appearing on the mainpage under "From today's featured article", see Wikipedia:Featured articles. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:27, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Grammatical errors in locked articles

Helped There is a grammatical error on a locked page (the author used “whom” when it should have been “who.” If the page were not protected, I would make the correction, but it is locked. Any suggestions? I can provide the details if you like. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenwald.1 (talk • contribs) 13:26, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greenwald.1 you may be able to request an edit on the article's talk page. A link to the article would help people give more specific advice. TSventon (talk) 13:31, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This was also asked in more detail on Wikipedia talk:Help desk: Eman 235/talk 13:51, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Ivanka Trump article is protected to prevent vandalism, hence it cannot easily be edited. In the section on Personal Life, the author has written: ... Ivanka Trump was the family member whom "everyone in the family seems to acknowledge" is Donald Trump's "favorite" child. “whom” is incorrect; “who” would be correct.

I’m not interested in getting into the details of how to make this change on a locked page. I’d appreciate it is someone who is skilled in such matters would make the change. Greenwald.1 (talk) 13:42, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. You can use edit requests for this in the future. Eman 235/talk 13:49, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To protect a page

In Dr, Shamsheer's article every detail is fine and needs no unwanted edit or any deletion in future. Can page be protected?

Also, can anyone explain what's the meaning of Archived from Original.

Thanks. (223.230.143.25 (talk) 16:43, 29 June 2019 (UTC))[reply]

Pages are not protected merely to preserve their content, only if there is a problem such as vandalism or edit warring. 331dot (talk) 16:58, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! The article looks great, but per Wikipedia policy, "Wikipedia is built around/with the principle that anyone can edit it, and it therefore aims to have as many of its pages as possible open for public editing so that anyone can add material and correct errors." For that reason, future editors are free to continue editing the article in order to improve the encyclopedia. Page protection is only done when necessary. The policy is here: WP:PROTECT. Orville1974^talk 17:00, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Archived from the original": when web pages go offline, they are sometimes saved in the Wayback Machine. References are often updated to point to the Wayback archive. But it often still useful to have a link to the original URL. So a reference might read:

"Example Domain". Archived from the original on 2017-09-14. Retrieved 2019-06-29.

where "Example Domain" links to the Wayback Machine and "the original" links to the page Wayback got the snapshot from. Eman 235/talk 17:02, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In addition - "archived from original" is something on webpages where a "snapshot" is held (archived) so it doesn't later become a dead link. It helps to prevent WP:LINKROT. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:04, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What happens when archived from original shows error?
Can that error be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.230.143.25 (talk) 17:11, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. It would help if you gave us a clue what error, and where you're seeing it. "Can that error be removed?" is like phoning a garage who don't know you and saying "Hello. Can you fix my car?" --ColinFine (talk) 19:28, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not an error. It's arguably how references should look. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:30, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the error being referred to is the 404 or 500 (or whatever) error one gets when one clicks on a dead link, such as the ones frequently linked in templates in the text "Archived from the original". Eman 235/talk 21:46, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can a dead link which shows 404 or 500 error repaired again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.230.143.25 (talk) 01:21, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @IP In general yes, but if that page was deleted (and not renamed) the webmaster of that site has to do this. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 05:44, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IPs and e-mail

It has always been my understanding that IPs cannot use Wikipedia to send e-mail. It makes sense because a person can set up an e-mail only when they register. Why then does the block form for IPs allow administrators to disable e-mail (and I've seen admins check the box)? Shouldn't it be grayed out?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:30, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin, but this might be to prevent logged-in users from an IP address from sending emails if the address is hard blocked. Danski454 (talk) 01:59, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I don't follow you.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:05, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

mw:Help:Blocking users#Blocking says: "Sending email: When this option is selected, the user will be unable to use the Special:EmailUser interface. If an IP address or range is blocked with this option, and it is not set for anonymous users only, accounts logged in from that IP address or range are unable to use Special:EmailUser." PrimeHunter (talk) 10:26, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to follow up just to recap: (1) Danski454 is correct and (2) IPs themselves can never send e-mail. I do hard-block IPs frequently (as CU blocks), so I will bear in mind whether disabling e-mail is appropriate. Thanks to both of you.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:03, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]